Anna Karenina

Jacqueline Bisset gives a heartfelt reading of the great Russian heroine and is at perhaps the peak of her beauty having past her girlish prettiness and entered into an exquisite loveliness. The awesome Paul Scofield commands the screen every second he is present and makes the cuckolded husband's anguish and sense of betrayal and the cruelty that is the result understandable. Christopher Reeve cuts a dashing figure and gives it his best shot but his costars simply act rings around him. This was Jackie's TV bow and reminds you of a time when movie stars moving to television were afforded the opportunity to do something special because there were fewer networks and larger audiences willing to give quality work a chance.

I have always been a huge Jacqueline Bisset Fan and believe my opinion of her was sealed when I saw this wonderful made for TV movie in 1985. Many women have tried to capture the essence of Anna Karenina but most have never captured all of it. I believe Ms. Bisset has achieved that and the psychologically dependent, multi-faceted Anna is totally believable in Bisset's hands as she agonizes over the choices life is now presenting her with. On the surface, the differences between Karenin and Count Vronsky are clear and yet...divorce was anathema for women living in that era. Paul Scofield is superb as Karenin and no one has done it better than he! So too Anna Massey, Judi Bowker, Joanna David and Ian Ogilvy are quite creditable in their roles. The only drawback for me was the casting of Christopher Reeve as the "dashing" Count Vronsky. He did not have the "dash" or flair and certainly did not possess the acting chops to handle such a stylized, European role. As tall and as handsome as he was, he never had the finesse necessary for such a piece and outside of the terrible coincidence involving the accident with his horse, which paralleled his real-life tragedy...I do not believe he should have been cast.

Is okay, Anna. If its any consolation now.... I would not have been able to resist Count Vronsky either.

The best production of this story I've seen. Christopher Reeve in his prime. Jacqueline Bisset gives a flawless performance. Stunning cinematography, costumes, the Hungarian interiors, all superb. Filmed in 1985. I write this review in 2024. Obviously much has happened in that time span. "Superman" was not for me. Reeves' best movies, in my mind, were "Somewhere in Time", "The Rose and the Jackal", and this movie. "Remains of the Day" should be included, but he had only a small part. Loved loved loved Mr. Reeve. Rest in peace, sir.

This 1985 version of Anna Karenina (unfortunately unobtainable at present on DVD) has some good things in it - mainly the performances of some of the actors. Chief among these are Jacqueline Bisset as the eponymous heroine, mature yet still youthful and sensual though never over-dramatic, and Paul Scofield, who makes Karenin very human despite his cold nature. It is unfortunate that Christopher Reeve is only adequate as Vronsky, his acting was rather wooden though he looks impressive, but although eight years younger than Bisset he comes across as being about the same age, which should not be the case. Joanna David is good as Dolly, but Judi Bowker's limited range is unable to make much of Kitty, although the script (see below) gives her limited scope anyway.

The worst aspect of the film is the script. It dumps completely the Kitty/Levin parallel plot, probably for time considerations - Levin does not appear at all, and Kitty does so only when needed in relation to Vronsky. This causes at least two serious losses - the stark contrast between the Anna/Vronsky and Kitty/Levin relationships, which is an important thread running through the book; and the contrast between the formality and dissipation of city and society life on the one hand, and on the other, the simplicity and truth of the countryside. These were very important to Tolstoy. Even in more minor ways, though, the script is poor - it changes parts of the Anna/Vronsky/Karenin story, and even has scenes which are not in the book or are almost unrecognisable because they have been changed.

The suicide scene is well staged, which is often far from the case; but the scene at the start with the railway worker's death is not shown properly at all, which somewhat destroys the intended comparison.

Production values put an emphasis on quietly luxurious settings. The film was shot with rather dark lighting, which although probably realistic, now seems very old-fashioned.

Of the numerous versions of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, my personal favourite will always be Greta Garbo's (even if it has a couple of shortcomings, namely Fredric March's Vronsky), with Vivien Leigh's also being very good, and the Joe Wright-directed version faring weakest despite the excellent production values and Karenin. This Anna Karenina has a good amount to like, while also falling short, one of the weaker adaptations while hardly disgracing itself.

The story is given very lavish treatment here, with very elegant photography for a made for TV film, lavish sets and splendidly colourful costumes. It's nicely directed, the dialogue flows well and is intelligent and poignant and of the key scenes the colourful ballroom scene stands out and while the suicide scene is not as heart-rending as in Garbo's version it still brings a lump to the throat. The cast are impressive, and the performances equally so. Ian Ogilvy, Anna Massey and Joanna David are dependable in roles well-suited to them and their talents, their roles are not huge due to compressions but they are still believably solid. Of the three leads, Paul Scofield is particularly good as a particularly reptilian Karenin (a character played consistently well in all four versions personally seen), while Jacqueline Bisset's interpretation of Anna is very heartfelt and dashing Christopher Reeve gives one of the better performances of Vronsky on film (a character very problematically cast and performed in the other three versions, especially in the Joe Wright film). Reeve and Bisset's chemistry does convince, there is a sense that these two characters would give up everything for one another which makes the events in the latter half even more devastating.

However, Anna Karenina (1985) does feel too short, two and a half hours seems a long time but with such a big story and this much abridged it did seem the case here, and also too rushed. The story has many moments where it's passionate and moving, but it would have made more of an impact if the pace had slowed down (personally wanted more time to breathe and take in the atmosphere more) and the length was longer. The omissions (including major characters that are at best mentioned once or twice) and that it's very condensed gives a slightly bland and skimmed over, on-the-surface feel, the most significant details are here, the spirit and the full emotional punch isn't quite so much. Also the music score is rather routine and pedestrian, not necessarily distracting but at the same time there's nothing here that's special or memorable.

All in all, a decent adaptation with a lot of good merits but it's not my favourite adaptation of Anna Karenina. 6/10 Bethany Cox